So it basically goes like this: Angola starts to kick out Congolese citizens living in Angola, almost 18,000 since July. The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) says “for reals?” and shows a bunch of Angolan citizens to the door, well, border when it launches its own repatriation operation. So then Angola says “oh, yeah?” and increases the pace of expulsions of Congolese. The DRC says, “yeah,” and sends more Angolans over the border, approximately 28,000 since August. Angola says…well, you get the point.

Angola and the DRC have a long history of porous borders with refugees crossing back and forth escaping internal conflict, citizens looking for employment and best of all, politicians dabbling in each others internal conflicts. But the violence and disregard for the lives of those involved in this latest tit for tat is seriously uncool.

Angolan police, immigration officers, citizens and soldiers have been accused of beatings, sexual assaults and stealing the possessions of the Congolese they are expelling. (more…)

Jordanian journalist Rana Husseini’s new book examines the charged issue of honor killings of women that occur in Jordan, Syria, Pakistan, and other countries. Murder in the Name of Honor chronicles many years of careful research and reporting carried out by Ms Husseini, who writes for the English-language Jordan Times, and has won numerous awards, including the Reebok Human Rights Award.

Honor killings of women and girls are carried out by their male relatives in order to restore the honor of the family due to a woman’s perceived unchaste behavior. The issue is understandably highly sensitive, and until the intrepid and tireless reporting on the subject by Ms Husseini, the subject was not discussed openly. Largely because of Ms Husseini, the issue of honor killings has become a matter of public debate in Jordan. While the Jordanian royal family has long advocated for changes to laws that provide for lenient sentences for those convicted of honor killings, resistance to change has been persistent among certain sectors of society, who believe that toughening the penalties for those committing honor killings would somehow send a signal that unchaste behavior is acceptable. Amnesty International has campaigned to end the tolerance of honor killings in countries such as Jordan and has called for amendments to laws that allow these human rights violations to continue.

Amnesty International reported that there were at least 16 incidents of honor killings in Jordan in 2008. In March 2008 a man who had killed his married sister in 2007 was sentenced to just three months in prison. He murdered her because of her supposedly “immoral behavior” which included leaving home without her husband’s permission and speaking to other men on her mobile phone.

Ms Husseini will be on a tour of the United States over the next month to promote her book. She will be speaking at a number of public events including:

San Francisco on October 14 at 7 pm at the Modern Times Bookstore, 888 Valencia Street.

She will be speaking and signing her book in Chicago on October 19 at 7 pm at the Book Cellar, 4736 N. Lincoln Avenue at an event sponsored by Amnesty International USA and the National Organization for Women. She will be introduced by Rafia Zakaria, a member of Amnesty International’s Board of Directors and an expert on women and Islamic Law.

New York on October 21 at 7 pm at Bluestockings Bookstore 172 Allen Street.

Washington DC on October 27 at 6:00 pm at Busboys and Poets Bookstore, 2021 14th Street.

Jestina Mukoko

Over the past thirty years, tens of thousands of Zimbabweans have died, faced torture, or been assaulted at the hands of the State. Yet the legal system has refused to hold the perpetrators of these human rights violations accountable. That is, perhaps, until now.

Justina Mukoko, Director of the Zimbabwe Peace Project, spent ten years documenting such incidents of state-sanctioned violence. On December 13, 2008, she was kidnapped by persons then unknown from her home. She spent almost three weeks in incommunicado detention, enduring long rounds of interrogation punctuated by beatings on the soles of her feet. The purpose of her torture: force an admission she had recruited fellow Zimbabweans for military training in Botswana in order to overthrow Zimbabwe’s government.

The lie that justified her detention might have stood if not for Mukoko and her lawyers. As she went to trial, her attorneys filed a motion before the Supreme Court contending that her arrest, torture, and detention denied her basic rights under Zimbabwe’s Constitution. Further, habeas corpus petitions forced State Security Minister Didymus Mutasa to admit in court that she had been illegally abducted by state agents acting under his direct orders.

On September 28th, the Supreme Court handed down a shocking decision. The justices unanimously ordered the government to drop all charges against Mukoko, ruling that the state’s unlawful abduction, use of torture, and prolonged covert detention was so lawless and reckless that justice demanded that the state drop all charges against her.

For Justina Mukoko, this ruling was not enough, as the individuals who mistreated her remained unpunished. Less than a week later, she filed a $500 million civil suit against her tormentors: Mutasa, Police Commissioner Augustine Chihuri, and several police officers and members of the Central Intelligence Organisation. Her lawyers may soon add her actual torturers to the list.

It will take years for the politicized judiciary in Zimbabwe to become an independent and objective enforcer of the rule of law. Justina Mukoko, after coming back from the black hole of a Zimbabwe prison, had a tenacity and courage that forced even the justices on Zimbabwe’s highest court to try to reign in President Robert Mugabe’s torturers. If her case is a sign of growing judicial independence, and if individual security agents will be held accountable for their brutality, Zimbabwe may yet start to move toward justice for those human rights defenders who have suffered, like Mukoko, so terribly much for so unmercifully long.

By Rowly Brucken, AIUSA Zimbabwe Country Specialist

This posting is part of our Forced Evictions in Africa Series

A woman sits in the ruins of houses destroyed in the Cambamba neighbourhoods of Luanda, Angola to make room for a luxury housing complex.

Luanda, Angola hosted World Habitat Day last year. UN Habitat’s Executive Director Anna Tibaijuka called upon President dos Santos to allocate 10% of Angola’s oil income to upgrading vital social services such as housing, plumbing, clean water and electricity and praised Angola’s stated commitment toward a slum revitalization program. Approximately 85% of Angolans live in slum conditions surrounding major cities.

In response, President dos Santos stated his government was waging “a sustained war against chaotic urbanization.” I would agree with that analysis. It certainly looks like a battleground when armed forces enter a neighborhood, raze houses, evict families and destroy their homes and belongings. Since 2001, Amnesty International has documented the forcible eviction of more than 10,000 persons from slum dwellings in Angola, often accompanied by violence including police indiscriminately firing their weapons and beating women and children. And the reason why these evictions have occurred? To facilitate urban development projects and the construction of luxury housing.

In April 2009, Angola announced the creation of a special fund to build one million houses over the next four years. That’s great. But three months later in July, three thousand families were forcibly evicted from the Luanda neighborhoods of Iraque and Bagdad, utterly demolishing homes and possessions.

“Armed police, soldiers and presidential guards arrived in both neighbourhoods at 3am on 20 July and ordered people out of their homes before bulldozers began to demolish the houses. The residents stood and watched as their homes were being demolished. Some of those who tried to stop the demolitions were beaten.”

Well, that’s a little awkward Mr. dos Santos. You say you are following up on your campaign commitment to provide housing because you are concerned about social unrest and then you have your government thugs throw families into the street in the middle of the night in winter, beating them up when they try to salvage a portion of their possessions and dignity. Seems like you might want to consider building those houses at a faster pace than the ones you are tearing down.

Help Human Rights Live in Angola. Stand Up Against Forced Evictions in Africa. Take action now.

This posting is part of our Forced Evictions in Africa Series.

A seven-year-old boy cries after the destruction of his family home at Porta Farm, Harare, Zimbabwe, June 2005. © Tsvangirayi Mukwazhi

Seven hundred thousand people. That is the number of people forcibly evicted from their homes and business over a three month period in 2005. This is the equivalent of bulldozing the entire city of Charlotte, North Carolina. Seem incomprehensible? Seem reprehensible? Think something should be done about it?  We think so to.

Between May and July 2005, the government of Zimbabwe orchestrated Operation Murambatsvina; a slum clearance program touted by officials as necessary to decrease rising urban populations by requiring people to return to rural areas. In reality, the purpose was to disperse members of political opposition parties and disrupt their ability to organize. Houses and informal businesses were bulldozed, leaving people with nowhere to live and no way to earn a living.

Currently, thousands of informal traders continue to face forcible eviction as the government targets vendor stalls in Harare for demolition. Unemployment in Zimbabwe remains near 90%. These market stalls provide goods at a price affordable by the populace and generate necessary income for those unable to work in the formal sector. The mayor of Harare defended these actions by claiming the stalls were a health hazard and violated city regulations.

As we continue a week commemorating World Habitat Day, Amnesty International calls upon the government of Zimbabwe to cease the harassment of informal traders, discontinue the egregious practice of forcible evictions which violate Zimbabwe’s obligations under the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and provide restitution to those it has previously displaced. Join Amnesty International in its effort to assure that Human Rights Live Here.

Hamas, the de facto administration in the Gaza Strip, released a video of 23 year old Gilad Shalit.  Gilad, an Israeli soldier, was seized by armed Palestinian groups over three years ago in June 2006 in a cross ‘border’ raid.  The video is significant as armed Palestinian groups have been detaining him incommunicado except for a couple of letters and an audio tape released over two years ago. Gilad has been denied communication with not only his family, but also the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) which contravenes international law. Since his capture, Amnesty International has consistently called for his releaseand for the ICRC to have access to him.  AI has done this using both public actions and behind the scenes dialogue.

Negotiations for Gilad Shalit’s release have intensified under the current government of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahuand Gilad’s family as well as the nation has been increasingly concerned about his condition and treatment.  The following video, although in Hebrew, shows a pale, but otherwise healthy looking Gilad Shalit holding a paper from September 14th.

In exchange for the video, which Israel requested as ‘proof of life’, Israel released 19 Palestinian women prisoners; another female prisoner is due to be released sometime next week.  Israel holds several thousand Palestinians, including hundreds of children, in Israeli prisons against international law.  Hundreds of detainees are also held without charge or trial under administrative detention orders which can be repeatedly renewed and often includes children.  Currently, one child is held under administrative detention, Hamdi Al-Ta’mari.  Amnesty International is working on his case.  More information available at http://www.dci-pal.org/english/display.cfm?docID=1096&categoryid=16.

Others have been convicted in unfair trials in military courts.  It is a major concern that prisoners are held in Israeli prisons instead of in the occupied Palestinian territories which is against international law.  Since detainees are held within Israel proper, it is very difficult for families to visit minors in detention or other family members.

This video produced by B’tselem explains how the imprisonment of Palestinians inside Israel proper affects families, including the children:

This exchange, although bringing temporary relief to the Shalit family and joy to the families of the 20 detained female prisoners just highlights the concern Amnesty International outlined in the document ‘Detainees used as bargaining chips by both sides in Israel/Gaza conflict’ published in March 2009.  Gilad Shalit, it is believed was taken as leverage in future negotiations with Israeli authorities and many believe Palestinians are regularly taken by Israeli forces for many reasons other than security and one of them is for leverage as well.  Hostage taking, that is threatening to harm or continue to detain a detained person in order to compel a third party to do or abstain from doing something as a condition of their release is expressly prohibited under international law.  Such practice threatens the fundamental right to life, personal integrity and liberty and is expressly prohibited by international humanitarian law.  Under no circumstances is the taking of hostages justifiable.

Negotiations continue with Israel wanting Gilad Shalit released immediately and the Palestinians asking for at least 1,000 Palestinian prisoners to be released and/or an end to the punishing blockade of the strip.

First off, apologies for the title. I couldn’t stop myself. That being said, South African President Jacob Zuma traveled to Zimbabwe last week for either one of two reasons, depending on who you were asking. According to South Africa and the current majority political party MDC, Zuma was there in his role as Chair of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), guarantors of Zimbabwe’s unity government, to encourage resolution on outstanding issues of contention between MDC and the former ruling party ZANU-PF regarding the political agreement structuring the unity government. However, according to President Robert Mugabe of ZANU-PF, Zuma was only in town to open an agricultural show.

Zuma met privately with the three signatories to Zimbabwe’s Global Political Agreement (GPA)-President Mugabe, Prime Minister Tsvangirai and Deputy Prime Minister Mutambara-and offered absolutely nothing productive to break the on going stalemate, which is pretty much as expected. Despite prior assurances that he would speak strongly against any “deviant behavior,” he failed to hold any of the signatories accountable for the continuing human rights violations in Zimbabwe or demand an immediate resolution to the political difficulties hampering the State. In the meantime, Mutambara of MDC-M is facing increasing difficulties as he is challenged within his own party and heckled by the official State paper.

SADC meets this week in Kinshasa, DRC where the Chair will transitition to President Kabila, who has failed dismally in managing catastrophic human rights violations within his own borders. But you can do you part to let SADC and President Kabila know you are watching what happens in Zimbabwe by sending a message to the SADC leadership urging them to protect women in Zimbabwe.

Since July 2008, abortion in all circumstances has been banned in Nicaragua. The new law makes no exceptions for terminating pregnancies that endanger the health or life of the woman, or that result from rape or incest. Girls or women seeking or obtaining abortions are subject to imprisonment. Health care professionals providing abortions — or even unintentionally injuring a fetus — face jail time and being barred from practice.

A new Amnesty International report, The Total Abortion Ban in Nicaragua, details the effects of the new measures. Medical professionals are put in an impossible situation: they’re prevented, on pain of criminal prosecution, from providing essential medical services — in direct contradiction of best-practice guidelines from the Ministry of Health. Women who need abortions to preserve their health — or lives — have to find doctors willing to risk prosecution and suspension of their license, or seek out dangerous back-alley terminations.

The ban has a chilling effect, too, on women suffering obstetric complications: one woman admitted to a hospital following a miscarriage was so frightened that she would be charged with having an abortion that she asked doctors not to intervene. The rate of maternal deaths in Nicaragua has increased: Official figures show that 33 girls and women have died in pregnancy or childbirth so far this year, up from 20 in the same period a year ago.

Finally, girls and women who become pregnant as a result of sexual violence must either carry the pregnancy to term, or look for risky, clandestine abortions. Our researchers spoke with women, raped by relatives, who were forced to give birth — sometimes to their own brothers or sisters. In every case, it’s low-income women who are hit hardest — richer Nicaraguans are able to travel abroad to escape the ban.

Now, all of this was shockingly, appallingly predictable — but the full litany of violations makes terrible reading. That the Nicaraguan health minister is dismissing the report just shows how hard human rights supporters will have to push to overturn the ban.

Take action today!

Read the whole report (or the digest), o en Español (digest).

Lilli Evans contributed to this post.

BTL stands for bitubal ligation, or surgical sterilization of women by damaging the fallopian tubes. It was reported yesterday that the International Community of Women Living with HIV/AIDS (ICW) has documented cases of HIV positive women undergoing coerced or forced sterilizations dating back to at least January 2008. Two of the women who say they underwent these sterilizations have filed legal suit against the Namibian government.

The issue involves lack of consent. The women report being told they need to have surgery and “signed consent forms to undergo what was simply listed on their health documents as a “BTL” without fully understanding its implications.” Women were also frequently provided consent forms in English rather than their home language and so were therefore not fully informed regarding the nature of the procedure. The Namibian Ministry of Health and Human Services has thus far declined to comment.

Namibia has a 15% HIV infection rate, one of the highest in the world. Yet, this does not even come close to justifying denying a woman the right to have a child. Children are born healthy every day to HIV positive women thanks to drugs that help prevent mother to child transmission. And while this seems egregious, forced sterilizations have occurred in the past and present in concentration camps, to disabled women and  indigenous populations. But really, Namibia. How about rising a step above and honoring your committments as a ratifier of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Seriously.

A leading research group in South Africa released the results of a survey where one in four men admitted to having committed rape and nearly half admitted to raping more than one person. The study also drew a correlation between violence and HIV prevalence. When you consider the culture of impunity surrounding violence against women in South Africa, the survey is not surprising in the least. “According to the researchers, many of the study’s participants appeared to see no problem with what they had done.”

Current South Africa President Jacob Zuma was acquitted of rape in 2006. The very fact that a case against him was even brought to trial is surprising.  Only one in nine rapes are ever reported and only a fraction of those are brought to trial. During the trial, the judge allowed his supporters to gather outside the courthouse and chant “burn the bitch.” When testifying, Zuma acknowledged a sexual encounter but stated that as the woman was dressed “provocatively” in traditional dress, “it was against Zulu culture for a man to leave a sexually aroused woman unsatisfied.” Zuma also stated that he knew the woman was HIV positive but that he showered after the encounter and because he was healthy deemed this enough of a preventative measure.

Since his inauguration, Zuma has indicated an intention to make crime prevention a priority and has set up a ministry to promote women’s and children’s rights.  But what is most necessary for South Africa is for men who are in positions of power to serve as role models that violence against women is not acceptable. Men in South Africa need to step up and take responsibility for the culture of violence and impunity and demand that their mothers, grandmothers, daughters, sisters, wives and girlfriends are treated with respect rather than with abuse. And it needs to come from the top down. Yes, President Zuma, I am talking to you.